The subjective psychoactive effects of oral dronabinol studied in a randomized, controlled crossover clinical trial for pain

Cannabis Sativa targets mediobasal hypothalamic neurons to stimulate appetite

The neurobiological mechanisms that regulate the appetite-stimulatory properties of cannabis sativa are unresolved. This work examined the hypothesis that cannabinoid-1 receptor (CB1R) expressing neurons in the mediobasal hypothalamus (MBH) regulate increased appetite following cannabis vapor inhalation. Here we utilized a paradigm where vaporized cannabis plant matter was administered passively to rodents. Initial studies in rats characterized meal patterns and operant responding for palatable food following exposure to air or vapor cannabis. Studies conducted in mice used a combination of in vivo optical imaging, electrophysiology and chemogenetic manipulations to determine the importance of MBH neurons for cannabis-induced feeding behavior. Our data indicate that cannabis vapor increased meal frequency and food seeking behavior without altering locomotor activity. Importantly, we observed augmented MBH activity within distinct neuronal populations when mice anticipated or consumed food. Mechanistic experiments demonstrated that pharmacological activation of CB1R attenuated inhibitory synaptic tone onto hunger promoting Agouti Related Peptide (AgRP) neurons within the MBH. Lastly, chemogenetic inhibition of AgRP neurons attenuated the appetite promoting effects of cannabis vapor. Based on these results, we conclude that MBH neurons contribute to the appetite stimulatory properties of inhaled cannabis.

Cannabinoids in the treatment of cancer anorexia and cachexia: Where have we been, where are we going?

Cachexia-anorexia cancer syndrome remains an unmet clinical need with a dearth of treatment and no standard of care. Acting through the endocannabinoid system, cannabinoids are one potential cancer cachexia treatment. Herein, the potential mechanisms for cannabinoids for cancer cachexia are discussed as are previous and ongoing clinical trials.

A Complete Endocannabinoid Signaling System Modulates Synaptic Transmission between Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Neurons

The endocannabinoid system (ECS) modulates synaptic function to regulate many aspects of neurophysiology. It adapts to environmental changes and is affected by disease. Thus, the ECS presents an important target for therapeutic development. Despite recent interest in cannabinoid-based treatments, few preclinical studies are conducted in human systems. Human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) provide one possible solution to this issue. However, it is not known if these cells have a fully functional ECS. Here, we show that hiPSC-derived neuron/astrocyte cultures exhibit a complete ECS. Using Ca2+ imaging and a genetically encoded endocannabinoid sensor, we demonstrate that they not only respond to exogenously applied cannabinoids but also produce and metabolize endocannabinoids. Synaptically driven [Ca2+]i spiking activity was inhibited (EC50 = 48 ± 13 nM) by the efficacious agonist [R(+)-[2,3-dihydro-5-methyl-3-[(morpholinyl)methyl]pyrolol [1,2,3-de]-1,4-benzoxazin-yl]-(1-naphthalenyl)methanone mesylate] (Win 55,212-2) and by the endogenous ligand 2-arachidonoyl glycerol (2-AG; EC50 = 2.0 ± 0.6 µm). The effects of Win 55212-2 were blocked by a CB1 receptor-selective antagonist. Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol acted as a partial agonist, maximally inhibiting synaptic activity by 47 ± 14% (EC50 = 1.4 ± 1.9 µm). Carbachol stimulated 2-AG production in a manner that was independent of Ca2+ and blocked by selective inhibition of diacylglycerol lipase. 2-AG returned to basal levels via a process mediated by monoacylglycerol lipase as indicated by slowed recovery in cultures treated with 4-[Bis(1,3-benzodioxol-5-yl)hydroxymethyl]-1-piperidinecarboxylic acid 4-nitrophenyl ester (JZL 184). Win 55,212-2 markedly desensitized CB1 receptor function following a 1-day exposure, whereas desensitization was incomplete following 7-day treatment with JZL 184. This human cell culture model is well suited for functional analysis of the ECS and as a platform for drug development. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Despite known differences between the human response to cannabinoids and that of other species, an in vitro human model demonstrating a fully functional endocannabinoid system has not been described. Human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) can be obtained from skin samples and then reprogrammed into neurons for use in basic research and drug screening. Here, we show that hiPSC-derived neuronal cultures exhibit a complete endocannabinoid system suitable for mechanistic studies and drug discovery.

The antinociceptive activity and mechanism of action of cannabigerol

Cannabis has been used for centuries to treat pain. The antinociceptive activity of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) or cannabidiol (CBD) has been widely studied. However, the antinociceptive effects of other cannabis components, such as cannabichromene (CBC) and cannabigerol (CBG), have rarely been revealed. The antinociceptive mechanism of CBG is not yet clear, so we investigated the antinociceptive effect of CBG on different pain models, and explored the mechanism of action of CBG to exert antinociceptive effects. In the current study, we compared the antinociceptive effects of CBC, CBD, and CBG on the carrageenan-induced inflammatory pain model in mice, and the results showed that CBG had a better antinociceptive effects through intraplantar administration. On this basis, we further investigated the antinociceptive effect of CBG on CIA-induced arthritis pain model and nerve pain model in mice, and found that CBG also relieved on both types of pain. Then, we explored the antinociceptive mechanism of CBG, which revealed that CBG can activate TRPV1 and desensitize it to block the transmission of pain signals. In addition, CBG can further activate CB2R, but not CB1R, to stimulate the release of β-endorphin, which greatly promotes the antinociceptive effect. Finally, the safety test results showed that CBG had no irritating effect on the rabbits' skin, and it did not induce significant biochemical and hematological changes in mice. Transdermal delivery results also indicated that CBG has certain transdermal properties. Overall, this study indicates that CBG is promising for developing a transdermal dosage for pain management.

Cannabinoids versus placebo for pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of cannabinoids in participants with pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis, Trial Sequential Analysis, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, and BIOSIS.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Published and unpublished randomised clinical trials comparing cannabinoids versus placebo in participants with any type of pain.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All-cause mortality, pain, adverse events, quality of life, cannabinoid dependence, psychosis, and quality of sleep.

RESULTS

We included 65 randomised placebo-controlled clinical trials enrolling 7017 participants. Fifty-nine of the trials and all outcome results were at high risk of bias. Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis showed no evidence of a difference between cannabinoids versus placebo on all-cause mortality (RR 1.20; 98% CI 0.85 to 1.67; P = 0.22). Meta-analyses and Trial Sequential Analysis showed that cannabinoids neither reduced acute pain (mean difference numerical rating scale (NRS) 0.52; 98% CI -0.40 to 1.43; P = 0.19) or cancer pain (mean difference NRS -0.13; 98% CI -0.33 to 0.06; P = 0.1) nor improved quality of life (mean difference -1.38; 98% CI -11.81 to 9.04; P = 0.33). Meta-analyses and Trial Sequential Analysis showed that cannabinoids reduced chronic pain (mean difference NRS -0.43; 98% CI -0.72 to -0.15; P = 0.0004) and improved quality of sleep (mean difference -0.42; 95% CI -0.65 to -0.20; P = 0.0003). However, both effect sizes were below our predefined minimal important differences. Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis indicated that cannabinoids increased the risk of non-serious adverse events (RR 1.20; 95% CI 1.15 to 1.25; P < 0.001) but not serious adverse events (RR 1.18; 98% CI 0.95 to 1.45; P = 0.07). None of the included trials reported on cannabinoid dependence or psychosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabinoids reduced chronic pain and improved quality of sleep, but the effect sizes are of questionable importance. Cannabinoids had no effects on acute pain or cancer pain and increased the risks of non-serious adverse events. The harmful effects of cannabinoids for pain seem to outweigh the potential benefits.

Placebo Response and Media Attention in Randomized Clinical Trials Assessing Cannabis-Based Therapies for Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Persistent pain is a common and disabling health problem that is often difficult to treat. There is an increasing interest in medicinal cannabis for treatment of persistent pain; however, the limited superiority of cannabinoids over placebo in clinical trials suggests that positive expectations may contribute to the improvements.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the size of placebo responses in randomized clinical trials in which cannabinoids were compared with placebo in the treatment of pain and to correlate these responses to objective estimates of media attention.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic literature search was conducted within the MEDLINE and Embase databases. Studies published until September 2021 were considered.

STUDY SELECTION

Cannabinoid studies with a double-blind, placebo-controlled design with participants 18 years or older with clinical pain of any duration were included. Studies were excluded if they treated individuals with HIV/AIDS or severe skin disorders.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses reporting guideline. Data were extracted by independent reviewers. Quality assessment was performed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool. Attention and dissemination metrics for each trial were extracted from Altmetric and Crossref. Data were pooled and analyzed using a random-effects statistical model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Change in pain intensity from before to after treatment, measured as bias-corrected standardized mean difference (Hedges g).

RESULTS

Twenty studies, including 1459 individuals (mean [SD] age, 51 [7] years; age range, 33-62 years; 815 female [56%]), were included. Pain intensity was associated with a significant reduction in response to placebo, with a moderate to large effect size (mean [SE] Hedges g, 0.64 [0.13]; P < .001). Trials with low risk of bias had greater placebo responses (q1 = 5.47; I2 = 87.08; P = .02). The amount of media attention and dissemination linked to each trial was proportionally high, with a strong positive bias, but was not associated with the clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Placebo contributes significantly to pain reduction seen in cannabinoid clinical trials. The positive media attention and wide dissemination may uphold high expectations and shape placebo responses in future trials, which has the potential to affect the outcome of clinical trials, regulatory decisions, clinical practice, and ultimately patient access to cannabinoids for pain relief.

Medical cannabinoids: a pharmacology-based systematic review and meta-analysis for all relevant medical indications

BACKGROUND

Medical cannabinoids differ in their pharmacology and may have different treatment effects. We aimed to conduct a pharmacology-based systematic review (SR) and meta-analyses of medical cannabinoids for efficacy, retention and adverse events.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed (registered at PROSPERO: CRD42021229932) eight databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of dronabinol, nabilone, cannabidiol and nabiximols for chronic pain, spasticity, nausea /vomiting, appetite, ALS, irritable bowel syndrome, MS, Chorea Huntington, epilepsy, dystonia, Parkinsonism, glaucoma, ADHD, anorexia nervosa, anxiety, dementia, depression, schizophrenia, PTSD, sleeping disorders, SUD and Tourette. Main outcomes and measures included patient-relevant/disease-specific outcomes, retention and adverse events. Data were calculated as standardized mean difference (SMD) and ORs with confidence intervals (CI) via random effects. Evidence quality was assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias and GRADE tools.

RESULTS

In total, 152 RCTs (12,123 participants) were analysed according to the type of the cannabinoid, outcome and comparator used, resulting in 84 comparisons. Significant therapeutic effects of medical cannabinoids show a large variability in the grade of evidence that depends on the type of cannabinoid. CBD has a significant therapeutic effect for epilepsy (SMD - 0.5[CI - 0.62, - 0.38] high grade) and Parkinsonism (- 0.41[CI - 0.75, - 0.08] moderate grade). There is moderate evidence for dronabinol for chronic pain (- 0.31[CI - 0.46, - 0.15]), appetite (- 0.51[CI - 0.87, - 0.15]) and Tourette (- 1.01[CI - 1.58, - 0.44]) and moderate evidence for nabiximols on chronic pain (- 0.25[- 0.37, - 0.14]), spasticity (- 0.36[CI - 0.54, - 0.19]), sleep (- 0.24[CI - 0.35, - 0.14]) and SUDs (- 0.48[CI - 0.92, - 0.04]). All other significant therapeutic effects have either low, very low, or even no grade of evidence. Cannabinoids produce different adverse events, and there is low to moderate grade of evidence for this conclusion depending on the type of cannabinoid.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabinoids are effective therapeutics for several medical indications if their specific pharmacological properties are considered. We suggest that future systematic studies in the cannabinoid field should be based upon their specific pharmacology.

The Effectiveness of Cannabis and Cannabis Derivatives in Treating Lower Back Pain in the Aged Population: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Cannabis is increasingly used in the management of pain, though minimal research exists to support its use since approval. Reduction in stigma has led to a growing interest in pharmaceutical cannabinoids as a possible treatment for lower back pain (LBP). The objective of this review was to assess the role and efficacy of cannabis and its derivatives in the management of LBP and compile global data related to the role of cannabis in the management of LBP in an aging population.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using predetermined keywords by 3 independent researchers. Predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, and 23 articles were selected for further analysis.

RESULTS

Studies identified both significant and insignificant impacts of cannabis on LBP. Contradicting evidence was noted on the role of cannabis in the management of anxiety and insomnia, 2 common comorbidities with LBP. The existing literature suggests that cannabis may be used in the management of LBP and comorbid symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research is needed to consider cannabis as an independent management option. There is a lack of evidence pertaining to the benefits of cannabis in an aged population, and thus, additional research is warranted to support its use in the aged population.

Approved cannabinoids for medical purposes - Comparative systematic review and meta-analysis for sleep and appetite

BACKGROUND

Cannabinoids are used for numerous disease indications. However, cannabinoids can also produce adverse effects; for example, they can disturb physiological functions such as sleep and appetite. The medical use of cannabinoids refers to a wide variety of preparations and products. Approved cannabinoid products include dronabinol ((-)-trans-Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), nabilone (a THC analogue), and cannabidiol (CBD) that differ in their pharmacology and may thus have different adverse effects on sleep and appetite.

OBJECTIVES

Here we ask if (i) cannabinoids decrease sleep and appetite in somatic patients or patients that suffer from mental illness and if (ii) there is a difference between THC products (nabilone, dronabinol), vs. CBD in disturbing these physiological functions.

METHODS

In order to answer these two questions, we performed a comparative systematic review (SR) for nabilone, dronabinol, and CBD. For the comparative SR we searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and extracted information for adverse side effects or outcomes reporting a negative impact on sleep and appetite. RCT evidence was calculated as odds ratios (ORs) via fixed effects meta-analyses. Evidence quality was assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias and GRADE tools. This study is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42021229932).

FINDINGS

A total of 17 RCTs (n = 1479) and 15 RCTs (n = 1974) were included for sleep and appetite, respectively. Pharmaceutical THC (nabilone, dronabinol) does not affect sleep or appetite. In contrast, there is moderate evidence that CBD decreases appetite (OR = 2.46 [1.74:4.01] but has also no effect on sleep.

INTERPRETATIONS

Our comparative systematic study shows that approved cannabinoids can decrease appetite as a negative side effect - an effect that seems to be driven by CBD. Approved cannabinoid products do not negatively affect sleep in somatic and psychiatric patients. This article is part of the special Issue on "Cannabinoids".

Clinical Data for the Use of Cannabis-Based Treatments: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature

Objective:

To compile and synthesize the available literature describing medical cannabis use across various disease states.

Data Sources:

PubMed, EBSCO, and Google Scholar searches were conducted using MeSH and/or keywords.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

Studies were included if they described the use of cannabis-based products and medications in the treatment of a predefined list of disease states in humans and were published in English. The extraction period had no historical limit and spanned through April 2019.

Data Synthesis:

Evidence was compiled and summarized for the following medical conditions: Alzheimer disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, autism, cancer and cancer-associated adverse effects, seizure disorders, human immunodeficiency virus, inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis (MS), nausea, pain, posttraumatic stress disorder, and hospice care.

Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice:

Based on identified data, the most robust evidence suggests that medical cannabis may be effective in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, seizure disorders, MS-related spasticity, and pain (excluding diabetic neuropathy). Overall, the evidence is inconsistent and generally limited by poor quality. The large variation in cannabis-based products evaluated in studies limits the ability to make direct comparisons. Regardless of the product, a gradual dose titration was utilized in most studies. Cannabis-based therapies were typically well tolerated, with the most common adverse effects being dizziness, somnolence, dry mouth, nausea, and euphoria.

Conclusions:

As more states authorize medical cannabis use, there is an increasing need for high-quality clinical evidence describing its efficacy and safety. This review is intended to serve as a reference for clinicians, so that the risks and realistic benefits of medical cannabis are better understood.

Analgesic Effects of Cannabinoids for Chronic Non-cancer Pain: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Meta-Regression

There is growing interest in using cannabinoids for chronic pain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of cannabinoids for chronic non-cancer pain. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL and clinicaltrials.gov were searched up to December 2018. Information on the type, dosage, route of administration, pain conditions, pain scores, and adverse events were extracted for qualitative analysis. Meta-analysis of analgesic efficacy was performed. Meta-regression was performed to compare the analgesic efficacy for different pain conditions (neuropathic versus non-neuropathic pain). Risk of bias was assessed by The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and the strength of the evidence was assessed using the Grade of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Forty-three randomized controlled trials were included. Meta-analysis was performed for 33 studies that compared cannabinoids to placebo, and showed a mean pain score (scale 0-10) reduction of -0.70 (p < 0.001, random effect). Meta-regression showed that analgesic efficacy was similar for neuropathic and non-neuropathic pain (Difference = -0.14, p = 0.262). Inhaled, oral, and oromucosal administration all provided statistically significant, but small reduction in mean pain score (-0.97, -0.85, -0.45, all p < 0.001). Incidence of serious adverse events was rare, and non-serious adverse events were usually mild to moderate. Heterogeneity was moderate. The GRADE level of evidence was low to moderate. Pain intensity of chronic non-cancer patients was reduced by cannabinoids consumption, but effect sizes were small. Efficacy for neuropathic and non-neuropathic pain was similar.

Perspectives on cannabis as a substitute for opioid analgesics

With the opioid epidemic reaching new heights in the USA, it has become critical to find suitable alternatives to opioids. Cannabis, an antinociceptive, is a strong contender to help patients reduce their opioid usage. A growing literature has been examining the complex effects cannabis has on pain relief and on opioid usage; whether it is a substitute for opioids or increases their use. This review explores the studies that compare cannabis-opioid interactions and presents some challenges of cannabis research and usage. The practical clinical pharmacology of cannabis as an analgesic, including the route of administration, safety and pharmacokinetics, are discussed to address the concerns, as well as possible solutions, of cannabis as a pain reliever.

Cannabinoids and Pain: New Insights From Old Molecules

Cannabis has been used for medicinal purposes for thousands of years. The prohibition of cannabis in the middle of the 20th century has arrested cannabis research. In recent years there is a growing debate about the use of cannabis for medical purposes. The term ‘medical cannabis’ refers to physician-recommended use of the cannabis plant and its components, called cannabinoids, to treat disease or improve symptoms. Chronic pain is the most commonly cited reason for using medical cannabis. Cannabinoids act via cannabinoid receptors, but they also affect the activities of many other receptors, ion channels and enzymes. Preclinical studies in animals using both pharmacological and genetic approaches have increased our understanding of the mechanisms of cannabinoid-induced analgesia and provided therapeutical strategies for treating pain in humans. The mechanisms of the analgesic effect of cannabinoids include inhibition of the release of neurotransmitters and neuropeptides from presynaptic nerve endings, modulation of postsynaptic neuron excitability, activation of descending inhibitory pain pathways, and reduction of neural inflammation. Recent meta-analyses of clinical trials that have examined the use of medical cannabis in chronic pain present a moderate amount of evidence that cannabis/cannabinoids exhibit analgesic activity, especially in neuropathic pain. The main limitations of these studies are short treatment duration, small numbers of patients, heterogeneous patient populations, examination of different cannabinoids, different doses, the use of different efficacy endpoints, as well as modest observable effects. Adverse effects in the short-term medical use of cannabis are generally mild to moderate, well tolerated and transient. However, there are scant data regarding the long-term safety of medical cannabis use. Larger well-designed studies of longer duration are mandatory to determine the long-term efficacy and long-term safety of cannabis/cannabinoids and to provide definitive answers to physicians and patients regarding the risk and benefits of its use in the treatment of pain. In conclusion, the evidence from current research supports the use of medical cannabis in the treatment of chronic pain in adults. Careful follow-up and monitoring of patients using cannabis/cannabinoids are mandatory.

The role of cannabinoids in pain control: the good, the bad, and the ugly

Cannabinoids appear to possess many potential medical uses, which may extend to pain control. A narrative review of the literature has found a variety of studies testing botanical and synthetic cannabinoids in different pain syndromes (acute pain, cancer pain, chronic noncancer pain, fibromyalgia pain, migraine, neuropathic pain, visceral pain, and others). Results from these studies are mixed; cannabinoids appear to be most effective in controlling neuropathic pain, allodynia, medication-rebound headache, and chronic noncancer pain, but do not seem to offer any advantage over nonopioid analgesics for acute pain. Cannabinoids seem to work no better than placebo for visceral pain and conferred only modest analgesic effect in cancer pain. Cannabinoids do many good things - they appear to be effective in treating certain types of pain without the issues of tolerance associated with opioids. Negatively, marijuana currently has a very murky legal status all over the world - laws regulating its use are inconsistent and in flux. Thus, both patients and prescribers may be unsure about whether or not it is an appropriate form of pain control. Cannabinoid-based analgesia has been linked to potential memory deficits and cognitive impairment. A great deal more remains to be elucidated about cannabinoids which may emerge to play an important role in the treatment of neuropathic and possibly other painful conditions. There remains a great deal more to learn about the role of cannabinoids in pain management.

Sex-Dependent Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids: A Translational Perspective

Recent policy changes have led to significant increases in the use of cannabis for both medical and recreational purposes. Although men are more likely to endorse past month cannabis use and are more frequently diagnosed with Cannabis Use Disorder relative to women, a growing proportion of medical cannabis users are reported to be women. The increased popularity of cannabis for medical purposes and the narrowing gap in prevalence of use between men and women raises questions regarding sex-dependent effects related to therapeutic efficacy and negative health effects of cannabis and cannabinoids. The objective of this review is to provide a translational perspective on the sex-dependent effects of cannabis and cannabinoids by synthesizing findings from preclinical and clinical studies focused on sex comparisons of their therapeutic potential and abuse liability, two specific areas that are of significant public health relevance. Hormonal and pharmacological mechanisms that may underlie sex differences in the effects of cannabis and cannabinoids are highlighted.

Preferences for Medical Marijuana over Prescription Medications Among Persons Living with Chronic Conditions: Alternative, Complementary, and Tapering Uses

OBJECTIVES

Despite expanded legalization and utilization of medical cannabis (MC) internationally, there is a lack of patient-centered data on how MC is used by persons living with chronic conditions in tandem with or instead of prescription medications. This study describes approaches to use of MC vis-à-vis prescription medications in the treatment of selected chronic conditions.

DESIGN

Participants completed semistructured telephone interviews with open-ended questions. Content analysis of qualitative data identified themes and subthemes relating to patient approaches to using MC products.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty persons (mean age = 44.6 years) living with a range of chronic conditions (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease, spinal cord injury/disease, and cancer) who had qualified for and used MC in Illinois.

RESULTS

Participants described a range of approaches to using MC, including (1) as alternatives to using prescription or over-the-counter medications; (2) complementary use with prescription medications; and (3) as a means for tapering off prescription medications. Motives reported for reducing or eliminating prescription medications included concerns regarding toxicity, dependence, and tolerance, and perceptions that MC improves management of certain symptoms and has quicker action and longer lasting effects.

CONCLUSIONS

MC appears to serve as both a complementary method for symptom management and treatment of medication side-effects associated with certain chronic conditions, and as an alternative method for treatment of pain, seizures, and inflammation in this population. Additional patient-centered research is needed to identify specific dosing patterns of MC products associated with symptom alleviation and produce longitudinal data assessing chronic disease outcomes with MC use.

The great divide: Separation between in vitro and in vivo effects of PSNCBAM-based CB1 receptor allosteric modulators

While allosteric modulators of the cannabinoid type-1 receptor (CB₁) continue to be developed and characterized, the gap between the in vitro and in vivo data is widening, raising questions regarding translatability of their effects and biological relevance. Among the CB₁ allosteric modulators, PSNCBAM-1 has received little attention regarding its effects in vivo. Recently, pregnenolone was reported to act as an allosteric modulator of CB₁, blocking THC's effects in vitro and in vivo, highlighting the potential of CB₁ allosteric modulators for treatment of cannabis intoxication. We investigated the pharmacological effects of PSNCBAM-1 and two structural analogs, RTICBM-15 and -28, as well as pregnenolone, in both signaling and behavioral assays including [³⁵S]GTPγS binding, the cannabinoid tetrad and drug discrimination. While the CB₁ allosteric modulator PSNCBAM-1 attenuated THC-induced anti-nociception and its structural analog RTICBM-28 reduced THC's potency in drug discrimination, most cannabinoid effects in mice were unaffected. In contrast to the mouse studies, PSNCBAM-1 and analogs insurmountably antagonized CP55,940- and THC-stimulated [³⁵S]GTPγS binding and exhibited negative binding cooperativity with [³H]SR141716 with similar apparent affinities. Notably, RTICBM-28, which contains a cyano substitution at the 4-chlorophenyl position of PSNCBAM-1, exhibited enhanced binding cooperativity with CP55,940. In contrast to previous findings, pregnenolone did not block THC's effects in drug discrimination or [³⁵S]GTPγS. These data further highlight the difficulty in translating pharmacological effects of CB₁ allosteric modulators in vivo but confirm the established pharmacology of PSNCBAM-1 and analogs in molecular assays of CB₁ receptor function.

Endogenous Opiates and Behavior: 2015

This paper is the thirty-eighth consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2015 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior, and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia, stress and social status, tolerance and dependence, learning and memory, eating and drinking, drug abuse and alcohol, sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology, mental illness and mood, seizures and neurologic disorders, electrical-related activity and neurophysiology, general activity and locomotion, gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions, cardiovascular responses, respiration and thermoregulation, and immunological responses.

Clinical/Therapeutic Approaches for Cannabinoid Ligands in Central and Peripheral Nervous System Diseases: Mini Review

OBJECTIVE

Cannabinoids, the components of Cannabis sativa Linnaeus, interact with CB1 and CB2 receptors, which are located both in the central nervous system and in the periphery and thus may exert a widespread biological activity in the body. The main medicinal properties of cannabinoids include analgesic, anti-inflammatory, antitumor, appetite stimulation, antiemesis, and muscle relaxation effects. This mini review aims to explore existing clinical trials that investigated the use of cannabinoids in diseases affecting the nervous system.

METHODS

We reviewed recent studies of cannabinoid-based therapy for disorders affecting central and peripheral nervous system in human subjects.

RESULTS

There is evidence that cannabinoid-based drugs may effectively control some symptoms associated with nervous system dysfunction, especially various types of pain and neurologic disorders, although studies are limited.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of cannabinoid drugs in the treatment of nervous system diseases should be verified in future large-scale randomized clinical trials.

Tasty THC: Promises and Challenges of Cannabis Edibles

Food products containing cannabis extract (edibles) have emerged as a popular and lucrative facet of the legalized market for both recreational and medicinal cannabis. The many formulations of cannabis extracts used in edibles present a unique regulatory challenge for policy makers. Though edibles are often considered a safe, discreet, and effective means of attaining the therapeutic and/or intoxicating effects of cannabis without exposure to the potentially harmful risks of cannabis smoking, little research has evaluated how ingestion differs from other methods of cannabis administration in terms of therapeutic efficacy, subjective effects, and safety. The most prominent difference between ingestion and inhalation of cannabis extracts is the delayed onset of drug effect with ingestion. Consumers often do not understand this aspect of edible use and may consume a greater than intended amount of drug before the drug has taken effect, often resulting in profoundly adverse effects. Written for the educated layperson and for policy makers, this paper explores the current state of research regarding edibles, highlighting the promises and challenges that edibles present to both users and policy makers, and describes the approaches that four states in which recreational cannabis use is legal have taken regarding regulating edibles.

Sex-dependent effects of cannabis-induced analgesia

BACKGROUND

Preclinical studies demonstrate that cannabinoid-mediated antinociceptive effects vary according to sex; it is unknown if these findings extend to humans.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis compared the analgesic, subjective and physiological effects of active cannabis (3.56-5.60% THC) and inactive cannabis (0.00% THC) in male (N=21) and female (N=21) cannabis smokers under double-blind, placebo-controlled conditions. Pain response was measured using the Cold-Pressor Test (CPT). Participants immersed their hand in cold water (4°C); times to report pain (pain sensitivity) and withdraw the hand (pain tolerance) were recorded. Subjective drug ratings were also measured.

RESULTS

Among men, active cannabis significantly decreased pain sensitivity relative to inactive cannabis (p<0.01). In women, active cannabis failed to decrease pain sensitivity relative to inactive. Active cannabis increased pain tolerance in both men women immediately after smoking (p<0.001); a trend was observed for differences between men and women (p<0.10). Active cannabis also increased subjective ratings of cannabis associated with abuse liability ('Take again,' 'Liking,' 'Good drug effect'), drug strength, and 'High' relative to inactive in both men and women (p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate that in cannabis smokers, men exhibit greater cannabis-induced analgesia relative to women. These sex-dependent differences are independent of cannabis-elicited subjective effects associated with abuse-liability, which were consistent between men and women. As such, sex-dependent differences in cannabis's analgesic effects are an important consideration that warrants further investigation when considering the potential therapeutic effects of cannabinoids for pain relief.

An Exploratory Human Laboratory Experiment Evaluating Vaporized Cannabis in the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain From Spinal Cord Injury and Disease

Using 8-hour human laboratory experiments, we evaluated the analgesic efficacy of vaporized cannabis in patients with neuropathic pain related to injury or disease of the spinal cord, most of whom were experiencing pain despite traditional treatment. After obtaining baseline data, 42 participants underwent a standardized procedure for inhaling 4 puffs of vaporized cannabis containing either placebo, 2.9%, or 6.7% delta 9-THC on 3 separate occasions. A second dosing occurred 3 hours later; participants chose to inhale 4 to 8 puffs. This flexible dosing was used to attempt to reduce the placebo effect. Using an 11-point numerical pain intensity rating scale as the primary outcome, a mixed effects linear regression model showed a significant analgesic response for vaporized cannabis. When subjective and psychoactive side effects (eg, good drug effect, feeling high, etc) were added as covariates to the model, the reduction in pain intensity remained significant above and beyond any effect of these measures (all P < .0004). Psychoactive and subjective effects were dose-dependent. Measurement of neuropsychological performance proved challenging because of various disabilities in the population studied. Because the 2 active doses did not significantly differ from each other in terms of analgesic potency, the lower dose appears to offer the best risk-benefit ratio in patients with neuropathic pain associated with injury or disease of the spinal cord.

PERSPECTIVE

A crossover, randomized, placebo-controlled human laboratory experiment involving administration of vaporized cannabis was performed in patients with neuropathic pain related to spinal cord injury and disease. This study supports consideration of future research that would include longer duration studies over weeks to months to evaluate the efficacy of medicinal cannabis in patients with central neuropathic pain.

The Medicinal Cannabis Treatment Agreement: Providing Information to Chronic Pain Patients Through a Written Document

AIM

Pain practitioners would seem to have an obligation to understand and inform their patients on key issues of the evidence base on cannabinoid therapeutics. One way to fulfill this obligation might be to borrow from concepts developed in the prescription of opioids: the use of a written agreement to describe and minimize risks. Regrettably, the widespread adoption of opioids was undertaken while harmful effects were minimized; obviously, no one wants to repeat this misstep.

OBJECTIVE

This article describes a method of educating patients in a manner analogous to other treatment agreements.

BACKGROUND

Surveys have demonstrated that pain is the most common indication for medical use of cannabis. As more individuals gain access to this botanical product through state ballot initiatives and legislative mandate, the pain specialist is likely to be confronted by patients either seeking such treatment where permitted, or otherwise inquiring about its potential benefits and harms, and alternative pharmaceuticals containing cannabinoids.

METHODS

PubMed searches were conducted using the following keywords: cannabis guidelines, harmful effects of cannabis, medical marijuana, medicinal cannabis, opioid cannabis interaction, cannabis dependence and cannabis abuse

RESULTS

: The authors selected individual tenets a medicinal cannabis patient would be asked to review and acknowledge via signature.

CONCLUSIONS

Undoubtedly, the knowledge base concerning risks will be an iterative process as we learn more about the long-term use of medicinal cannabis. But we should start the process now so that patients may be instructed about our current conception of what the use of medicinal cannabis entails.

Medical marijuana patient counseling points for health care professionals based on trends in the medical uses, efficacy, and adverse effects of cannabis-based pharmaceutical drugs

The purpose of this report is to present a review of the medical uses, efficacy, and adverse effects of the three approved cannabis-based medications and ingested marijuana. A literature review was conducted utilizing key search terms: dronabinol, nabilone, nabiximols, cannabis, marijuana, smoke, efficacy, toxicity, cancer, multiple sclerosis, nausea, vomiting, appetite, pain, glaucoma, and side effects. Abstracts of the included literature were reviewed, analyzed, and organized to identify the strength of evidence in medical use, efficacy, and adverse effects of the approved cannabis-based medications and medical marijuana. A total of 68 abstracts were included for review. Dronabinol's (Marinol) most common medical uses include weight gain, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), and neuropathic pain. Nabiximol's (Sativex) most common medical uses include spasticity in multiple sclerosis (MS) and neuropathic pain. Nabilone's (Cesamet) most common medical uses include CINV and neuropathic pain. Smoked marijuana's most common medical uses include neuropathic pain and glaucoma. Orally ingested marijuana's most common medical uses include improving sleep, reducing neuropathic pain, and seizure control in MS. In general, all of these agents share similar medical uses. The reported adverse effects of the three cannabis-based medications and marijuana show a major trend in central nervous system (CNS)-related adverse effects along with cardiovascular and respiratory related adverse effects. Marijuana shares similar medical uses with the approved cannabis-based medications dronabinol (Marinol), nabiximols (Sativex), and nabilone (Cesamet), but the efficacy of marijuana for these medical uses has not been fully determined due to limited and conflicting literature. Medical marijuana also has similar adverse effects as the FDA-approved cannabis-based medications mainly consisting of CNS related adverse effects but also including cardiovascular and respiratory related adverse effects. Finally, insufficient higher-order evidence to support the widespread use of medical marijuana was found, but a limited amount of moderate-level evidence supports its use in pain and seizure management.

Prescribing smoked cannabis for chronic noncancer pain: preliminary recommendations

OBJECTIVE

To offer preliminary guidance on prescribing smoked cannabis for chronic pain before the release of formal guidelines.

QUALITY OF EVIDENCE

We reviewed the literature on the analgesic effectiveness of smoked cannabis and the harms of medical and recreational cannabis use. We developed recommendations on indications, contraindications, precautions, and dosing of smoked cannabis, and categorized the recommendations based on levels of evidence. Evidence is mostly level II (well conducted observational studies) and III (expert opinion).

MAIN MESSAGE

Smoked cannabis might be indicated for patients with severe neuropathic pain conditions who have not responded to adequate trials of pharmaceutical cannabinoids and standard analgesics (level II evidence). Smoked cannabis is contraindicated in patients who are 25 years of age or younger (level II evidence); who have a current, past, or strong family history of psychosis (level II evidence); who have a current or past cannabis use disorder (level III evidence); who have a current substance use disorder (level III evidence); who have cardiovascular or respiratory disease (level III evidence); or who are pregnant or planning to become pregnant (level II evidence). It should be used with caution in patients who smoke tobacco (level II evidence), who are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease (level III evidence), who have anxiety or mood disorders (level II evidence), or who are taking higher doses of opioids or benzodiazepines (level III evidence). Cannabis users should be advised not to drive for at least 3 to 4 hours after smoking, for at least 6 hours after oral ingestion, and for at least 8 hours if they experience a subjective "high" (level II evidence). The maximum recommended dose is 1 inhalation 4 times per day (approximately 400 mg per day) of dried cannabis containing 9% delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (level III evidence). Physicians should avoid referring patients to "cannabinoid" clinics (level III evidence).

CONCLUSION

Future guidelines should be based on systematic review of the literature on the safety and effectiveness of smoked cannabis. Further research is needed on the effectiveness and long-term safety of smoked cannabis compared with pharmaceutical cannabinoids, opioids, and other standard analgesics.

Neuropathic orofacial pain: cannabinoids as a therapeutic avenue

Neuropathic orofacial pain (NOP) exists in several forms including pathologies such as burning mouth syndrome (BMS), persistent idiopathic facial pain (PIFP), trigeminal neuralgia (TN) and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). BMS and PIFP are classically diagnosed by excluding other facial pain syndromes. TN and PHN are most often diagnosed based on a typical history and presenting pain characteristics. The pathophysiology of some of these conditions is still unclear and hence treatment options tend to vary and include a wide variety of treatments including cognitive behaviour therapy, anti-depressants, anti-convulsants and opioids; however such treatments often have limited efficacy with a great amount of inter-patient variability and poorly tolerated side effects. Analgesia is one the principal therapeutic targets of the cannabinoid system and many studies have demonstrated the efficacy of cannabinoid compounds in the treatment of neuropathic pain. This review will investigate the potential use of cannabinoids in the treatment of symptoms associated with NOP.